Tag Archives: GISS

Well, well, isn’t it funny how everyone who doesn’t believe in global warming and who doesn’t genuflect at the sight of Al Gore is accused by the warmers of being paid off by the oil companies or the Koch brothers?

Put the shoe on the other foot and find out global warming’s ‘hot’ scientist Dr. James Hansen is being paid by a green group and we see nothing hitting the fan in the MSM at all. Nothing here to see folks, move on now. If the warmers do it it’s perfectly OK. So, what happened?

So on Friday the Obama administration stopped fighting a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and released documents showing that Hansen was paid $250 an hour by a Canadian law firm for testimony against developing Alberta’s oil sands; income which Hansen does not appear to have disclosed.

$250 an hour? Not bad, we wonder if he got meals, hotel and transportation, too? We also wonder why he didn’t report it as required by law? So who was Hansen testifying for?

A January 20, 2009, document shows that the Canadian law firm Ackroyd LLP retained Hansen to prepare a report “regarding the anticipated greenhouse gas emissions from the Joslyn Oil Sand Mine.”

Ackroyd represents the Oil Sand Environmental Coalition (OSEC), a group fighting to stop oil sand development.Federal government employees are not allowed to accept money for expert testimony in proceedings before a court or agency of the United States. (This took place in Canada FYI).

And what about those reporting requirements? Reporting? Evidently Hansen must have a special exclusion for warmers or something.

It is still unclear how much money Hansen received from Ackroyd, however, since his 2010 financial disclosure form did not list them as a source of income. Neither does his 2009 form. There is also no record of his disclosing any travel expenses related to his 2010 oil sands testimony in Canada.

Of course, we also don’t see any rush from anybody at NASA, GISS, the Justice Department, the State Department or any other department to investigate and if need be prosecute. You probably won’t see anything in the warmer MSM either. Hypocrites!

Well, current Governor “Moonbean” and ex-governor “Governator,” here are some more “green” jobs California won’t see. Contrary to the belief’s of your Church of Global Warming, businesses are not jumping for joy about creating “green” jobs in California, but they do seem to be jumping for joy to create them anyplace and everyplace else.

In case you are both still unaware, there just aren’t a whole lot of people who are very excited about doing business in California anymore. Why should they when they can go elsewhere and have lower taxes, fewer regulations, less traffic, lower cost employees and cheaper land to build factories upon?

Today’s bad news for California is that Calisolar, headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, just got a $275 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy to build a new factory to make silicon for solar panels. Is this money going to be spent in California? Will this money create those “green” jobs you two and other greentards keep touting? Ummm…..no….it’s going to be built in Ohio. Gee, I wonder why? Couldn’t be things like taxes, over-regulation and high operating costs could it?

So, what’s Ohio’s gain and our loss? According to Brighter Energy……..

Calisolar estimates that the facility will generate, at its peak, nearly 1,100 permanent jobs and up to 1,000 construction jobs.

That is approximately 2,100 people in California who are losing out due to the draconian conditions created by our Taxocrats in Sacramento. Will they ever wake up and smell the coffee? Do they ever think of the unemployed who may work, the taxes that could be paid, the reduction in unemployment checks paid out and the healthcare plans that people could again have. Yes, our current crop of elected Taxocrats continue their failure to grasp the simple concept that businesses don’t want to be in the bad business environment they have created and that no business equals no tax revenue.

Think that’s bad? Well, there’s more in today’s news about California and specifically the San Francisco Bay Area, that does not bode well for the employment environment.

Not only will we not be seeing the estimated 2,100 jobs that could be had if Calisolar put this manufacturing plant here, but per the June 18, 2011 Contra Costa County Times, we have even more bad news on jobs here……..

The Bay Area lost 2,000 jobs during May, the East Bay shed 1,700 jobs and the South Bay lost 1,400 jobs, the Employment Development Department reported. California lost 29,200 payroll jobs last month. The numbers were adjusted for seasonal changes.

Now I don’t know who’s adjusting what (perhaps GISS created this report?), but 1,700 + 1,400 = 3,100, not 2000. The above also doesn’t seem to report the West or North Bay either. Perhaps they didn’t lose any jobs, which I find hard to believe. Regardless, that’s a significant number of lost jobs, as is the California grand total of 29,200.

Take the 2,100 people Calisolar won’t be hiring here plus the 3,100 lost jobs in May and that is 5,200 killed jobs in the San Francisco Bay Area alone.

All I can say is way to go guys and gals in Sacramento. Put more people out of work, increase the strain on the state budget and decrease the amount of tax revenue. How long before California goes broke? If they keep this up, not long. I guess they think they’re on a roll or something. Trouble is Sacramento is rolling in reverse. It will all accelerate when AB32 kicks in. I’d predict that California will soon repeat the 1930’s, only this time people will be fleeing en masse for Oklahoma.

How saving the planet causes famine: the climate crisis melts away but global food shortage is legacy of the foolish rush to biofuels.Evidence for dangerous, human-caused global warming was always slim, now it lies cruelly exposed both by a cruel blowback and it’s not just coming from within the science.A far more devastating catastrophe is unfolding and it is entirely the product of the mad rush to biofuels: third world famine. Today a whopping 6.5 percent of the world’s grain has been stripped from the global food supply. That’s the kind of catastrophic cut in food supply that triggers a tipping point so that Third World hunger explodes into mass starvation. Why did it happen?

Kyoto Protocol: The Trigger to Mass Starvation

What mechanism prompted mankind to instigate this genocide of the world’s poor? The Kyoto Protocol. International governments signed up to the idea that biofuels were going to be the better, cleaner, greener source for mankind’s energy needs in a new utopia predicted for us by ‘expert’s inside the United Nations.

Canadian Geophysicist Norm Kalmanovitch is as concerned as many independent scientists at the alarming rate at which this international food crisis is now escalating.

Kalmanovitch is semi-retired now and not in fear of having his scientific career tarnished by blowback from speaking out. He argues that the facts easily demonstrate that the Kyoto Protocol is based entirely on fraudulent science.

Misguided Climate Scientist Primed the Politicians

Honest scientific inquiry serves the single purpose of advancing human knowledge and understanding free of any bias or ulterior motivation and it is clear that promoting “human caused global warming” a full nine years after the world had already started cooling serves no such lofty purpose.

Kalmanovitch accuses a small clique of self-serving climate researchers for violating the fundamental ethics of science protocol and propagating the false science that made the Kyoto Accord the international vehicle for crimes against humanity. Listening to his arguments you cannot help but see he has a point.

So what was the root catalyst for this cataclysm? Astonishingly, you can pin a lot of it on one well-intentioned but misguided do-gooder. His name: Professor James Hansen. Hansen was NASA’s bright-eyed scientist back in 1988. The eager climate modeler appeared before a Congressional Committee and prophesized that mankind would kill the planet if it continued to burn coal and gasoline at modern industrial rates.

Kalmanovich explains, “When you look closely at the climate change issue it is remarkable that the only actual evidence ever cited for a relationship between CO2 emissions and global warming is climate models.”

Hansen made unfounded and highly alarmist claims based on his computer forecasts. He predicted doomsday scenarios that panicked Congress and that wave of fear stampeded the world into believing in a non-existent crisis. Global temperatures have never rocketed as Hansen forecast. In fact all five global temperature datasets show zero net global warming over the past decade in spite of record increases in CO2 emissions from fossil fuels (climate scientists have now grudgingly conceded no statistically significant rise in temperatures has occurred since 1998 from their doomsaying). But once the stampede was launched it caused a rush to biofuels that stripped millions of crop acreage from the world’s food basket.

But more sickening is that many have made sizeable fortunes from trumpeting a short period of warming that lasted from (1975-1998); a vast international array of speculators in wind, solar, wave and biofuels alternatives are onboard the great global warming gravy train.

Hansen’s friends in the infant science of climatology have also fed well off government grants where the ‘climate change’ industry generates tens of billions annually in this self-perpetuating Ponzi scheme that symbiotically melded the interests of speculators with climate researchers.

In effect, those great riches and shining scientific careers were together built upon exploiting a 0.6 C rise in temperatures that all but vanished in the first decade of the 21st Century.

Alternative Scientific Views Now Come to the Fore

But since Hansen’s watershed moment in 1988 the science has moved on and many independent scientists, not on the government grant gravy train, have cast their eyes over the numbers for carbon dioxide (CO2), the prime bogeyman of climate alarmism.

From physical measurement of the Earth’s radiative spectrum impartial eyes saw that the 14.77 micron band of the Earth’s thermal radiation accessed by CO2, is so close to saturation that it is a physical impossibility for any increase in that trace gas to have anywhere near the effect claimed.

Analysts then looked back at the natural warming since the 1830’s that ushered in the end of the Little Ice Age, a time 100 years before any scientist claims humans had impact on the climate. They say natural warming in the order of 0.5°Centigrade per century. We can calculate this to show that the maximum possible effect from CO2 increases is just 0.1°C per century of the claimed 0.6°C per century of the observed temperature increase.

Hansen and his self-serving followers in climatology conveniently chose to ignore such inconvenient truths. Kalmanovich seethes, “They falsely attributed the effect of CO2 to the full 0.6°C and incorporated a range of wavelengths from 7 to 14 microns when CO2 only has an effect over a range from 13.5 to 17 microns and the wavelength band is at least 80 percent saturated. Though never stated explicitly this formed the basis for the CO2 forcing parameter which Hansen used in his earlier climate models and is still used by the IPCC today with the basic formula of 5.35ln(2) = 3.71watts/m2 for a doubling of CO2.”

Like other independent scientists Kalmanovich saw that the fuss all stems from a 1981 paper by Hansen that was peer-reviewed and published in SCIENCE magazine. Here’s where Hansen’s alarmist and skewed climate models captivated scientific literature on the matter. It is by repeated reference to Hansen’s original paper and his 1988 modification of it that the current climate change issue was premised.

Global Warming Fraud Creates Third World Food Crisis

All the other evidence is either of warming or misrepresentations of the greenhouse effect but never of an actual relationship between the two other than a stated correlation stating that CO2 increased and global temperature increased and therefore CO2 caused the global temperature increase.

Kalmanovich’s findings have been corroborated by a group of independent scientists calling themselves the ‘Slayers’ who claim to have refuted the greenhouse gas effect.

They agree that correlation between temperatures and CO2 is easily refuted and they cite the same numbers used by the IPCC in the 2001 report.That report shows cyclic warming and cooling trends that are completely out of step with CO2 emissions as explained by Kalmanovich, “it shows rapid warming from 1910 to 1942 with only a trivial 14 per cent increase in CO2 emissions. That is followed by 33 years of a global cooling trend with a 500 percent increase in CO2 emissions from 1942 to 1975.”

Greenhouse Gas Theory Falls Apart

Kalmanovich argues that is more than enough physical evidence to completely destroy the greenhouse gas theory. But that requires the doomsayers to accept numbers and scientific arguments that they have not yet been prepared to do.

The irony of this travesty is that Hansen himself never claims in absolute terms that CO2 emissions cause global warming. Kalmanovich notes, “Hansen instead uses the output from his climate models to make this claim absolving him of having his statements challenged.”

This technique was masterfully employed by Al Gore in his Inconvenient Truth in which he makes no claims directly but shows out of context snippets of evidence to make the claims for him.

Here is Kalmanovich in-depth reasoning:

The satellite measurements of outgoing longwave radiation (OLR) demonstrate that OLR is responding strictly to the fourth power of the Earth’s absolute temperature in perfect accordance to basic physics theory, but is in no way responding to the 57.1% increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuels since 1979. This completely refutes the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, which is based on an assumed “enhanced greenhouse effect” from increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but these satellite measurements demonstrate conclusively that this enhanced greenhouse effect from GHG emissions never actually existed!

This single physical observation makes the Kyoto Protocol completely fraudulent, and anyone promoting the concept of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels enhancing the greenhouse effect in support of this fraudulent Kyoto Accord, must be seen as complicit in this fraud.

Kalmanovich then reaches a devastating conclusion:

“This is not a trivial scientific error because over 6.5% of the world’s grain has been removed from the global food supply to serve as feedstock for the 85 billion litres of ethanol produced annually as fuel in accordance with the dictates of this fraudulent UN Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change.”

It is basic food staples that are being removed from the global food supply; the wealthier portion of the world’s 6.6 billion people end up paying substantially more for their food but the poor simply starve, making this Kyoto Accord a true “crime against humanity” and those who have fabricated the false science on which this crime is based are therefore guilty of being complicit in this “crime against humanity”.

Green Energy Promise Just a Pipe Dream

Americans are fast waking up to the harsh reality that this is all pain for no gain. There is stagnation in constructing conventional power generating sources in the wake of large government subsidies to wind and solar power generating facilities. That has dramatically increased power bills but has provided virtually zero additional peak power to consumers.

There is also a huge moral issue in the US. It removes more food from the global food supply than any other country in the manufacture of ethanol for fuel, making Americans key culprit in this crime against humanity. In the United States a staggering 39.7 percent of the world’s ethanol is created from crops that should be used as food.

The new moral question now to be posed is: if the US government was truly looking after the interests of the people then shouldn’t better investment ought to be made in natural gas and coal conversions to liquid fuels? That would bring the price of gas to under $2.50/gal. President Obama could then do away with subsidizing biofuels production, which only serves to raise the price of gas at the pumps and add to world hunger.

Europe views 2011 as a critical year as member countries ramp up their production and use of ethanol to meet the European Union’s Renewable Energy Directive. In this year alone, Europe is expected to produce 5.4 billion liters of ethanol that is a 15 per cent increase over 2010 (see table).

World Ethanol Fuel Production in Million Liters

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Europe

1,627

1,882

2,814

3,683

4,615

5,467

Africa

0

49

72

108

165

170

Americas

35,625

45,467

60,393

66,368

77,800

79,005

Asia/Pacific

1,940

2,142

2,743

2,888

3,183

4,077

World

39,192

49,540

66,022

73,047

85,763

88,719

Source: F.O. Licht

The Global Renewable Fuels Alliance promotes “biofuels friendly policies internationally and represent over 65 per cent of the global biofuels production from 44 countries.” They predict only growth in this voracious business and if their numbers are correct, a death sentence is being issued on millions more in the future.

World Ethanol Production Forecast 2008-2012 by Country, Millions of Gallons

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

CAGR, %

Brazil

4,988

5,238

5,489

5,739

5,990

2.8%

U.S.

6,198

6,858

7,518

8,178

8,838

5.7%

China

1,075

1,101

1,128

1,154

1,181

1.4%

India

531

551

571

591

611

2.2%

France

285

301

317

333

349

3.2%

Spain

163

184

206

227

249

6.9%

Germany

319

381

444

506

569

9.7%

Canada

230

276

322

368

414

9.9%

Indonesia

76

84

92

100

108

5.6%

Italy

50

53

55

58

60

2.8%

ROW

2,302

2,548

2,794

3,040

3,286

5.7%

World

16,215

17,574

18,934

20,293

21,653

4.6%

(Note that these are imperial gallons and not U.S. gallons. This is why the 2010 value of 18,934 million gallons is 85,763 million liters and not 73,653 million liters as would be calculated for US gallons).

In this mad, bad crazy world western good intentions spawned a crime against humanity; the law of unintended consequences turned the Kyoto Accord into a perverse death sentence to millions. Now we must put an end to this genocide.

GOES-8 Satellite that will be missing 14 sensors it should have to see if we have global warming or not

From John O’Sullivan, via Canada Free Press, we get further information on Satellitegate. Satellitegate refers to problems that have been discovered with old satellites, satellite data, and even problems with satellites that have yet to be launched. This evidently has caused lots of action about this at NASA, NOAA, GISS and elsewhere.

In his article titled “Top Scientists Speak out on the Satellitegate Scandal” you can read about how this being exposed has affected things and some opinions of some scientists. It appears that one satellite has been shuttered and datasets may be disappearing.

US Government admits global warming satellite sensors “degraded” – temperatures may be out by 10-15 degrees. Now five satellites in controversy. Top scientists speak out.

In an escalating row dubbed ‘Satellitegate’ further evidence proves NOAA knew of these faults for years. World’s top climate scientists and even prior governmental reports cite underfunding and misallocation as the trigger for spiraling satellite data calamities. Key flaws with five satellites undermines global data.

Most disturbing of all is that it took publication of my article last week to persuade the authorities to withdraw the errant NOAA-16 satellite from service. But as Dr. John Christy indicates, the real Satellitegate is not about one satellite. The scandal is endemic with comparable flaws across the entire network; the scandal is also that it took a tip off from a member of the public and the widespread broadcast of my article before one of the offending junk boxes, NOAA-16, got taken down.

If you want to read about the whole big and getting bigger all the time scandal here are the links to the other articles and posts about Satellitegate.

I got a “tweet” from Watts Up With That” this morning about NASA being sued per this article, which led to me reading their take on it, which linked to an article on The American Spectator by Chris Horner about it. Here’s their take on it, my take on it, and some legal information from John O’Sullivan at the end.

CEI (The Competitive Enterprise Institute) is suing NASA because they’ve been requesting documents for about 3 years under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and NASA has been avoiding them like “warmers” avoid global cooling.

This morning in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Competitive Enterprise Institute is filing suit against NASA, calling the erstwhile space agency to account for its nearly three-year stonewall of access to internal documents exposing an abuse of taxpayer funds to advance the global warming agenda.

Seems there’s a lot going on at this agency that perhaps the general public is unaware of and the “warmers” either condone or look the other way about. Based upon the information from the two source websites, NASA has been running a website, probably with your tax dollars, to surreptitiously try to back up their BS about anthropogenic global warming. It’s called RealClimate.org, which is by the “warmers” for the “warmers” and of the “warmers.” Evidently the people at GISS and NASA never watched Superman when they were kids and “truth, justice and the American way” are completely foreign to them.

In this process, if only thanks to pressure on NASA after a December 2009 news story about their games, we have already obtained important emails among 2,000 or so pages released. These include an admission to USA Today’s weather editor that NASA GISS is just a modeling office, using the temperature record of …CRU, the ClimateGate outfit. That means their “independent temperature record” is actually a recapitulation of one that …doesn’t exist, but was withdrawn as a result of ClimateGate when the custodians admitted they actually lost all original data.

So whether the CRU claims were actually made up, as seems entirely plausible reading that crowd’s own nasty anti-scientific campaign in their own words, it is as good as made up, meaning non-existent, for any legal or scientific purpose. So we already know that two of the four supposed “independent temperature records” are down the drain. And they’re the only two subjected to anything resembling scrutiny.

Sounds like NASA is so full of it they actually had to start another site to get the general public to believe what they evidently can’t back up. They’re hiding out about that, too.

Also along the way, in recent months we won on administrative appeal after NASA denied that documents created and held on NASA assets were really agency records, if editing and managing a third-party activist and advocacy site, RealClimate.org. NASA originally denied access to the records (which they are still withholding) on the grounds that taxpayer-funded scientists were actually moonlighting and so the documents were not really the government’s property.

I had to ask what are the implications of all of this. As such I forwarded this to John O’Sullivan for his expert legal opinion on what’s actually going on beyond the obvious allegations that NASA is not only pumping out bald-faced lies, but actually is running a website with taxpayer funds to try to back the bald-faced lies up. Mr. O’Sullivan sent me the following email.

John,

Great link-thanks. CEI are onto something here and if they have smart attorneys they will, at some point along the legal line, employ the doctrine of spoliation (i.e. file a motion for relief for NASA’s evidence destruction/withholding).

If CEI’s lawyers have a credible prima facie case indicating taxpayer funds were misappropriated into, for example, creating and maintaining the advocacy website, ‘Real Climate,’ then the burden of proof shifts to the respondents (ie.Gavin Schmidt and James Hansen et al.) to disprove CEI’s claims-unreasonably denying the FOIA claims for a 3-year period may, in itself, be sufficient to cost NASA the case.

The law requires that if during this process, NASA fails to furnish any subpoenaed documents relevant to the CEI’s case, because they may have become ‘lost’ or destroyed, then those persons (but more likely NASA) become liable, under the spoliation doctrine, to a motion for summary judgment or an adverse inference jury instruction.

In plain speak, under U.S. civil and criminal law, any party destroying or hiding key evidence is very likely to lose the case. The result will probably be that the CEI claims will be upheld. But will anyone go to jail? Unlikely.

Because, just as in the U.K, American FOIA laws may ultimately prove toothless. Such regulations are ostensibly enacted and enforced by the current representatives of the people (i.e. the govt) for the benefit of the people (or in reality, the government). So, in effect, the whole circus may well be spun out, stymied or down played long enough to spare the blushes of the incumbent ruling political party.

So that all that may result is some ‘smacked hands’ and a token level of disrepute for the institution (NASA). As we saw in Britain (with CRU) an incumbent pro-warmist government like the current administration is not going to willingly pursue prosecutions that may create setbacks for their cap and trade agenda.

The U.S. Establishment will hope it all blows over, especially with the backdrop of a compliant-almost myopic-mainstream media that won’t make a fuss,either. I’m sure that’s close to what these characters hold up their sleeve.

Regards,

John

As you can see Mr. O’Sullivan is very aware of the laws regarding this and that while it sounds good on the face of it, the reality of the situation is that perhaps a few people will get sent to their room for a time-out but that most likely no one is going to lose their job or do any jail time. It’s real CO2 Insanity that those who appear to be promoting bald-faced lies using your tax dollars won’t have much, if anything happen to them. I can hope that this gets enough publicity in the MSM to at least embarrass them good and perhaps get the global warming fraud out more in the public eye, but I’ll bet (like John O’Sullivan) that the MSM (main stream media) will continue to act as though they’re “co-conspirators,” and no one’s going to hear much, if anything from them.

Where’s Perry Mason when you need him? What would they call this episode? How about “The Night of the Missing Climate Change?” Or, “The Case of the Inconvenient FOIA request?”